Men Going Their Own Way are as bad at Venn diagrams as they are at understanding women

The Men Going Their Own Way subreddit is filled with a lot of discussion that go something like this:

Yet the level of discourse that goes on amongst MGTOWs on Reddit and elsewhere does not exactly provide robust evidence for the alleged superiority of men.

I mean, these guys are seriously obtuse, and not just about women.

Consider this attempt at a Venn diagram, posted to the MGTOW subreddit by a fellow with the lovely moniker “C*ntplainer,” and intended as a sort of funny overview of the relationship between women and assorted types of men. Then consider that this diagram got 100 upvotes from Reddit’s MGTOWs, with one commenter declaring that “this is gonna be a classic.”

As you no doubt have noticed, this Venn diagram isn’t actually a Venn diagram at all. It’s more like a cargo cult version of a Venn diagram. Sure, it’s got overlapping circles and captions like a real Venn diagram, but they don’t represent overlapping sets. I mean, Mr. Plainer surely isn’t suggesting that some Chads are also Tyrones, and that some of these Chad/Tyrones are also women.

No, as best as I can tell, the overlapping circles represent some sort of interaction, with captions showing what someone from one or the other group involved in the interaction might say about it, at least in the minds of MGTOWs if not in the real world.

But even then it doesn’t follow any sort of logic. Who is supposedly getting genital warts from whom? Are Chad and Tyrone having sex with the same woman, who’s screaming “fuck me, yes!” Or are they fucking each other, too, with either Chad or Tyrone doing the screaming?

Also, why aren’t the incels overlapping with school shooters? It’s all a bit confusing.

C*ntplainer also posted this Venn diagram that actually is a Venn diagram, more or less. Alas, it’s also pretty stupid, if not quite as monumentally stupid as his other contribution.

Still, I’m pretty sure that neither any robber nor any woman has ever uttered the sentence “I am strong and independent but you support me.”

Comments

MGTOWs are kind to women, like when they 1) deny them professional and social opportunities by refusing to ever be in a room with them unless their wives can chaperone 2) tell a bunch of women they’ve just met that they’re not “marriage material.”

Should my wife die for whatever reason, there won’t be another one and my kids are with me on that one.

What the hell kind of a conversation is this to have with your kids??

Edit: Now I’m just imagining my stepdad sitting me down and being all like, “Hey, so you know how women all suck? Yeah. So if your mom dies, I’m not marrying another one of those harpies. Do I have your approval y/n. “

I’m imagining it more along the lines of “Yes, kids, I agree with you: your mother is irreplaceable. And if she dies, I’ll prove it by not replacing her, even if it turns out I can’t cook for beans.”

Of course, this version of the scenario presumes that 1) the kids are young and 2) that it’s a sitcom and therefore follows sitcom rules about marital roles and men’s abilities in the kitchen. Wacky hijinks ensue!

@Lainy – racism. Not-Western women haven’t been contaminated by femmmminismmmmm, so they are the pure submissive women that all women naturally are.*

It’s bullshit, and assumes feminism doesn’t exist in other cultures. It does.

*Don’t mind the rules that keep them that way! Surely, patriarchy doesn’t exist to reinforce continually gender roles, otherwise women would realise they are fully capable of doing anything the men can??

@better safe than sorry –

You say this –

mgtow essentially puts men’s interests above anything else.

But then later say this –

they will never take a risk that the opposite gender in anyway will take the men’s earned wealth as hostage.

And this –

I also know the Pence rule and as a conservative (!!) married man, I follow that rule pretty much.

Do you not see how your own two statements show that your first was a lie? Mgtow has nothing to do with men’s independence, and everything to do with keeping women In Their Place.

The first is presuming that women don’t actually bring anything to a marriage/relationship. While we are trying to shift the balance of cleaning, house management, and child rearing so that both genders (in a cis het relationship) take the labour equally, we aren’t there yet. Women do more of that, and did much more when alimony was a more common thing.

They also weren’t allowed to work outside of the house to earn their own money, all of their education was geared towards keeping house and child rearing. So when they suddenly needed to care for themselves after getting a divorce, what were they supposed to do??? The men in the relationship benefitted from the labour in the house for *years* in a typical relationship, but still gets to keep all the money? How much less would he have had if he needed to pay for a cleaning, cooking, ear-to-listen, comforter and manager of emotions, and child rearing service? Daycare is expensive AF.

So giving someone who he at one time professed to love money so she could live, update her skills, and find a job when her resume has a gap from graduation-now doesn’t seem bad. It probably sucked for him, because now he’s needing to pay for all the services she did before, or do it himself, or re-marry, but??? She’s probably got the kids, and is now needing to be the main wagewinner in a family.

TL;DR – Men didn’t ‘earn’ this money with no help from anyone. Their partner helped *a lot*, but people (for some unkown reason???) like to devalue traditional women’s labour.

Your second point, about the ‘pence rule’, actually ties in to the first. Say a woman *does* have a job. Say the men higher up in the power structure go out for a lunch meeting. She’s not invited, because she’d be the only women and none of their wives are there, this is a work thing silly! Wives don’t work!

I don’t know if you’ve ever actually worked, but there is a shit tonne of networking that happens at these things. A metric shit tonne. Without the ability to be invited to the ‘not-work’ events (golfing, drinks, whatever) the women have a HUGE disadvantage in actually networking?

Like, most people hate networking. But shooting the shit over some drinks is a nice way to get to know the outside-of-work sides of the people you work with, which lets you go “how’d that ballgame that you were taking your kids to go?” which lets *them* know that you listened to them, remembered what they said, and then wanted to follow up.

They think better of you.

People who are excluded from these events don’t get that opportunity, probably because *this is what women are socialised to do*, so would be better than the average man at it.

TL;DR, your statments proved that your first was a lie, and it was just *fingers kissing motion* beautifiul.

Also, I know that I am talking about white, middle class, neurotypical, and abled women here, and that WoC have other problems and experiences. Just to acknowledge that!!

Eta: also i know how bad it is that these events often take place after work, over drinks, and how that excludes people! It’s not good.

Men do their own things, be independent (from government or any other entitity), have a lot of friends, do a lot of hobbies, stay away from crime and be helpful to society. While they are friendly to the opposite gender (as they should)

LOL, no. That might be the theory, but in practice they spend the vast majority of their time and energy complaining about women. This is exactly the opposite of ‘going their own way’

they will never take a risk that the opposite gender in anyway will take the men’s earned wealth as hostage.

Speaks absolute volumes about their character

the laws of the land are stacked against men, should the relationship go south. And another thing, mgtowers don’t care what others think of them in spite of the negative rhetoric out there. You agree with mgtowers? Fine. You don’t agree with mgtowers? Fine. Because…they go their own way!

That’s actually really funny because all the women I know from the international house at my school hate American men. I’m good friends with one from China and Japan and they both agree that American men don’t have any values they would want for a husband.

@Rhuu an others.
Please mind your language. No need to use black gang street languages. I am trying to make an explanation and you all are raving…
My statements are no lies. If a man puts his interests above anything else, then he will make sure that it cannot be grabbed away through the feminist western court system. That means no cohabitation and no marriage with a western women. No contradiction, just common sense. A sensible well off bachelor does not believe in NAWALT stuff.

The prime role of a woman in the family is to take care of the kids, which means civic education, moral values and prepare them for their adult live. I will put it very blunt here: A woman who does poor in her career but has educated her children as role models in society, has been successful; a women who has excelled in her career at the expense of her children, has been a failure.
That’s my opinion and it will remain so. You don’t like it? Too bad.

You think that women can do anything a man can? OK, then make the Selective Services and the draft mandatory for men and women, like in Israel or Norway. Right now in many nations, including the US, women do not have to sign up for the draft, and feminists are very reluctant to address this great injustice. As long as this injustice has not been rectified, spare me the sobbing.
First wave feminism has addressed some very important balance issues regarding gender. But feminism has gone a dying path now and it hurts society and there are more and more women who have come to realize this. And as to how and why I ended up with a wife and can deal with her (as I don’t deserve one?) is very simple: She is very humble and most of all God-fearing, something I am pretty sure you are not.
We will never come to an agreement, so let’s just accept that.

I re-read my response, and I think he might be referring to when I used ‘AF’? I just… I can’t even…

The prime role of a woman in the family is to take care of the kids, which means civic education, moral values and prepare them for their adult live. I will put it very blunt here: A woman who does poor in her career but has educated her children as role models in society, has been successful; a women who has excelled in her career at the expense of her children, has been a failure.
That’s my opinion and it will remain so. You don’t like it? Too bad.

I HOPE YOU DON’T HAVE DAUGHTERS.

You think that women can do anything a man can? OK, then make the Selective Services and the draft mandatory for men and women, like in Israel or Norway.

Ladies, Gentlemen, and all other folxs, we have a reference to the Draft!!! Who has that in their bingo cards? ‘Cuz you can fill in that box!

Right now in many nations, including the US, women do not have to sign up for the draft, and feminists are very reluctant to address this great injustice. As long as this injustice has not been rectified, spare me the sobbing.

WAHHHH men have to sign up for the draft, a thing which hasn’t been used in years and will most likely not be used, wahhhh! This is completely comparable and totally worse than the wage gap! The pink tax! The horrific amount of sexual assaults! Intimate partner violence! The fact that traits that are associated with feminine people are, by their very definition, considered lesser!!!!

Won’t someone think of the draft-registerees????

First wave feminism has addressed some very important balance issues regarding gender. But feminism has gone a dying path now and it hurts society and there are more and more women who have come to realize this.

OMG what this is a two-fer??? If you have “third wave feminism has gone too far, unlike first (and/or second wave)” on your bingo cards, fill that one in too!!!

And as to how and why I ended up with a wife and can deal with her (as I don’t deserve one?) is very simple: She is very humble and most of all God-fearing, something I am pretty sure you are not.

That definition is the worst, and so are you. <3

Is this tantrum because you've had your ass handed to you in multiple threads? Because i think it's because you know you can't win, and all of your arguments are weaksauce that the people in here have refuted approximately eleventy billion times.

I was honestly expecting more from you, but here we are. I'm not mad, I'm just… disappointed, really.

Hahahaha what? We’re going to need some quoted examples, because I can’t even tell what you’re being racist about!

A sensible well off bachelor does not believe in NAWALT stuff.

I mean.. you did? You got married??

The prime role of a woman in the family is to take care of the kids

Some people structure their families this way. I’m not sure why you feel the need to prescribe this structure to every since m/f marriage in the entire world, but, yeah, it exists. Here’s the thing, though: You don’t get to on the one hand say men’s money belongs to them and then on the other hand say women have to stay home not earning money. Like, if you want to keep all your loot, then you’re going to have to have a partner that also makes decent bank. And also no kids, because kids need to eat, the li’l scamps.

Literally a couple weeks ago I received the latest issue of Finland’s leading feminist magazine, which argued (and not for the first time) against conscription.

And no, merely having to register for draft is not a major injustice. The real draft in US is for poor people, seeing how they end up dying in pointless foreign wars, while the concept of civilians dying from war in their own home is alien to most Americans.

Better safe then sorry is basically like MGTOW doesn’t women. And now I will come into a feminist space to tell you how trash women are, why can’t you just agree with that? you can’t let these men not wanting you be?

Even though they basically just shout at you that they don’t want you and how horrible you are instead of actually going their own way and leaving you the hell alone. This fucker couldn’t even do it right. He got married! failure right there.

Ironically, there was a lawsuit in 1981 challenging the fact that women are excluded from the draft.

Was it MGTOWs?

Nope. Feminists.

Wanna know who kept women from being drafted?

Dudes who didn’t want them in combat positions. Literally, that was why the Supreme Court ditched the case: because they thought drafting women who weren’t allowed in combat roles anyway was ridiculous.

Know who actually do work to try to eliminate the draft, seeing as an effort to make it not so sexist failed? Oh, and have worked and succeeded (in part) to make it so women can serve in (some) combat roles?

Still feminists. Not MGTOWs.

I know there’s a lot more to unpack in the troll’s comments, but kinda wanted to get the stupid stinking “BUt ThE DRafT” out of the way first.

Well, I’m completely shocked that a misogynistic conservative Christian is also racist. I mean, that almost never happens!

Interesting how he thinks all slang that originated with black people must be gang speak, huh? Personally, my approaching middle aged white self mostly hears slang for the first time on Rupaul’s Drag Race, but whatever.

If there are still people that believe that three women together don’t form a minefield for men, you all proved it wrong today. Thanks for the fun today!
I am going to clean the dishes now, while my wife makes me a cup of tea. Peace!

I re-read my response, and I think he might be referring to when I used ‘AF’? I just… I can’t even…

Although I think that BSTS might not even know what AF stands for and might actually be referring to “metric shit tonne”, it’s also clear that BSTS is racist, in fact racist AF, for thinking that somehow Black folk are responsible for the ongoing use of the word “shit” in the english language. It would be just as racist to think that of the word “fuck” or the abbreviation “AF”.

Seriously, if I’m not proof enough that white feminists drop F-bombs like Republicans drop tax rates, you could always take it from Nomy Lamm in her essay Fishnets, Feather Boas and Fat included in the anthology “Body Outlaws” (originally titled, Adios, Barbie!):

Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuckaroo, fuckaroni!

While Lamm has written many things, that quote is by far my favorite and the most frequently quoted in my home.

I will put it very blunt here: A woman who does poor in her career but has educated her children as role models in society, has been successful; a women who has excelled in her career at the expense of her children, has been a failure.

As a woman who does not and never will have children (by choice), I’d like to say how absolutely heartbroken I am to hear that some random racist troll on the internet thinks that I am a failure. Truly. I may never recover from such a blow.

It certainly isn’t as though there is a vast wealth of experiences, causes, and goals that one may find meaning in outside of biological offspring. (Well, not for women, anyway. Men are certainly able to have rich internal lives outside of children, but everyone knows that a woman’s only purpose is one thing.)

In the same comment, before he mentioned his wife waiting in bed for him, he thanked the other commenters for the “online menage”.

It was after he declared he was leaving our menage for something better involving a “real woman” in his bed that he popped his monocle learning that we might believe he had made a coded reference to sex.

I’m pretty sure “shit” has a long and storied history as an Anglo-Saxon cuss word, so the only freaking way black people are somehow responsible for it is if the word goes all the way back to Cheddar Man’s time.

I don’t understand why he freaked out about us thinking he was having the sex with his wife anyways. If my finance was home we probably wouldn’t leave our bed for much. I think it’s a pretty safe bet to think that married people have sex.

I’m going to have children and reach as high as I can in my career. My fiance and I want at least 3 kids. We might not be able to have biological kids and if we can’t that’s okay. I mean I’m sad about it but there is a world of children that don’t have families and need one. You bet your ass both my fiance and I will be working our asses off in our careers to give our kids everything they need.

I don’t think that necessarily follows. It’s more a matter of establishing (well, reinforcing) a two-tiered system where motherhood is valued above childlessness, so you can be as successful as you like, but if you have a baby that’s what you’re judged on, and a relatively decent mother is superior to an absolutely brilliant career woman, because raising babies is inherently more valuable. Sort of like “You may be the world’s greatest cashier, but that’s still not like being even a middling nuclear physicist.”

It’s a shamefully false comparison that depends on completely ignoring context and wiping out massive numbers of women (one who can’t have children, etc.), and one that devalues/demeans/disaparages all working women, but it doesn’t mean you can’t be successful. Just that your success will never make you equal to Saint Mommy. (Or, of course, to a man, for all the usual reasons.)

“then I, as a person with absolutely no children, can have absolutely no success?” →I never implied that.
“motherhood is valued above childlessness, so you can be as successful as you like, but if you have a baby that’s what you’re judged on, and a relatively decent mother is superior to an absolutely brilliant career woman, because raising babies is inherently more valuable” → A mother that educates her children in the process of upbringing is superior to anyone in the family, that includes the father.

I find it preposterous that if a mother decides to leave her career to put all her attention to the kids, that she gets shamed by society, and by feminists in particular.

Regarding the “other” troll some of you are referring to, uhm no, that’s not me.

You said that a woman who does well in her career is a failure. That’s what you said, those are your words. And now your trying to back peddle like you didn’t just tell women with no children that they have no value. In many threads I have expressed great want to be a mother and not a single feminist on here has shamed me for it like you’ve implied.

I find it preposterous that if a mother decides to leave her career to put all her attention to the kids, that she gets shamed by society, and by feminists in particular.

That’s rich considered you just shamed a bunch of women for being mothers and having careers. Your really transparent. Please just gtfo. Your annoying, racist, and sexist. No one wants you here.

Also I noticed you stayed out of the tattoo thread since it started talking about tattoos becoming a way for rape victims to reclaim their bodies. Is that a shred of decency from you or do your know if you sexiest ass goes into that you’ll get banned? For someone who suppose to GTOW you have a lot of fucking opinions on how women should be and how horrible they aren’t when they aren’t your dependent housewives.

I’m sure that since BSTS wants women to quit paid employment to raise their children, he is in full support of universal health care, increased wages and a more robust social safety net so that a single income household is actually financially viable for everyone?

We really need to stop pretending like most families even have the stay at home parent option available before we can even start discussing whether or not people should be staying at home.

A mother that educates her children in the process of upbringing is superior to anyone in the family, that includes the father.

What about a stay at home dad? Or aunt who took custody after the parents died? Or grandparents who take over childcare because the parent(s) can’t afford a home and move in, but still have to both work 2 jobs to put food on the table in this late-stage capitalist hellscape? Why the focus on the mother?

I guess it also wouldn’t be a big deal that, due to the event of a divorce, that child custody and support would greatly favor the mother. Automatic full custody and a HUGE amount of child support would be owed to her, and she should def keep the house and the big car. After all, she’s not supposed to work. Otherwise shes a failure. Right?

@Lainy: “You said that a woman who does well in her career is a failure. That’s what you said, those are your words”. No, if a mother does well in her career AT THE EXPENSE of her children, is a failure.
If she has no kids, my statement does not apply.

“I think we’ll need some examples of feminist theorists saying this. Modern examples, not something from the 70s”. →Sweden, as well as other European tax codes, that disfavor traditional families with one working breadwinner.

The thread regarding tattoos, give me the link and I will show you I am not that troll.
Lastly Lainy, in addition to some poor word choices (f-word) in your arguments, you are in the habit of telling me to “get lost, we don’t want you here etc”, Too my understanding, you don’t own this website.

@Kupo: “What about a stay at home dad etc” Valid point. My point is that both parents working and kids thrown into daycare is NOT the way to go for family. The fact that both parents need to work to get food on the table in the current setting of economy, is a sad state of affairs indeed. I have my reasons for this phenomenon too, but that would be too elaborate to go into.

Donate to the Mammoth!

We Hunted the Mammoth is an ad-free, reader-supported publication written and published by longtime journalist David Futrelle, who has been tracking, dissecting, and mocking the growing misogynistic backlash since 2010, exposing the hateful ideologies of Men’s Rights Activists, incels, alt-rightists and many others.

We depend on support from people like you. Please consider a donation or a monthly pledge by clicking below! there's no need for a PayPal account.

Send comments, questions, and tips for stories to me at dfutrelle@gmail.com, or by clicking here